# UN urges US to end Embargo



## RPB67 (Mar 26, 2005)

UN urges US to end Embargo

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061108/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/un_cuba


----------



## Sir Diggamus (Oct 10, 2006)

Good article!


----------



## RGD (May 10, 2006)

To quote:

"It was the 15th straight year that the 192-member world body approved a resolution calling for the U.S. economic and commercial embargo against Cuba to be repealed "as soon as possible."


I'm sure the US will jump right on it - 


Ron


----------



## SUOrangeGuy (Feb 22, 2006)

Isn't it our choice to decide if our trade embargo is illegal? If the US doesn't want to recognize Cuba that is our choice. F the UN.


----------



## LSUTIGER (Jan 13, 2004)

SUOrangeGuy said:


> Isn't it our choice to decide if our trade embargo is illegal? If the US doesn't want to recognize Cuba that is our choice. F the UN.


o

UN is worthless IMO, but I see where they are coming from. Don't hold your breath guys.


----------



## Stogiefanatic182 (Oct 28, 2005)

All I want are some legal cuban cigars damn it. This embargo is pissing me off big time.


----------



## qwerty1500 (Feb 24, 2006)

Do the Democrats like Cuba? Maybe something good will come of this election after all.


----------



## hollywood (Feb 15, 2005)

RGD said:


> To quote:
> 
> "It was the 15th straight year that the 192-member world body approved a resolution calling for the U.S. economic and commercial embargo against Cuba to be repealed "as soon as possible."
> 
> ...


:tpd: 'nuf said!

the main thing the US is interested in about Cuba right now is the offshore drilling fields and supposed abundance of crude there. i think we should have it; and certainly need it!


----------



## Airborne RU (Oct 7, 2006)

The UN is the only way many countries (that are jealous/envious of the US's favored position) have to hector the US.

Basically they can't do it in real life to they give us a hard time in the fantasy realm that is the UN.

Don't think we are going to move on this. Cuban expats are a force in Florida politics which is a state that both parties want.


----------



## mosesbotbol (Sep 21, 2005)

qwerty1500 said:


> Do the Democrats like Cuba? Maybe something good will come of this election after all.


Democrats started the Embargo. The USA has never listened to the UN and it's a shame. We have to have a world forum and abide by for the sake of the planet. It's like the law; no one should be above it. We all have to give up some to make peace, kind like the State of Nature in philosophy...


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

MAJOR THREADJACK WARNING

For humanitarian (famine, natural disaster, health, disease, etc etc) issues I see the a great need and use for the UN.

For the more difficult and weighty issues involving the natural predilection of the human species to attempt to kill each other they are woefully inept. hearkening back to Haile Selassie (Ethiopian King) pleading with the League of Nations to intercede in the Italian genocide perpetrated by Benito Mussolini (and his "blackshirts" wreaking genocide across his land in the 30's and 40's (during the majority of WWII). the League of Nations did nothing and the genocide in Ethiopia has largely been overshadowed by the Holocaust. Some say a direct result of the failures in the region of Africa ever since.

The UN's record to prevent such human tragedy associated with genocide has been equally as inept. Name the events over the past decade (or so) alone - Bosnia (eventually a NATO, not UN, intervention), Rwandan genocide, Kurdish genocide, Aristide and the Tonton Makout in Haiti, Kurds in Northern Iraq, Marsh Arabs in Southern Iraq, ongoing genocide in Darfur, and on and on.

The UN and it's minions are well meaning "sheep" (or any heard animal). They need a dominant member and some sheep seek that role - ie Kofi Annan. These "sheep" have a difficult time grappling with the violent nature of the world outside their herd. They often choose to ignore it. They don't mean to, it is their nature. They don't intend that their inattention and inability to intervene to hurt anyone, and they don't like it occurring but they are ill-equipped to prevent it.

To prevent it they need protection - hence the existence of the sheepdog. We act as the sheepdog for the sheep that populate the UN. Just as the sheep generally dislike and are uncomfortable with the dog, so is the UN uncomfortable with the necessary need of the US. Sheep, tolerate the dog for it's ability to protect them. The reason they are so uncomfortable is that the dog has the same equipment (jaws, teeth, strength, speed) and capacity for violence that their enemy the wolf has. The only way the herd has to be safe against the wolf is to have something equally as strong and destructive to combat it. Possessing those traits, however, makes the sheepdog forever an outsider to the herd.

Such is our unfortunate role as protector of the UN (sheep). The protective and abiding nature of the dog is mimiced by the stewardship the US has shown in the course of human history over the last century, often at the behest of the UN. We've made our mistakes, but no country in the course of human history has liberated and saved more of humanity than the abiding and always faithful (despite our shortcomings) sheepdog that is the US.

And as a rule, dogs don't smoke cigars. Therefore, when/if the embargo is lifted, the rest of the world has little to fear by overconsumption of cigars here in the US.

:sb ----- It's the scotch talking

Cheers,

BillyBarue


----------



## JPH (Jun 30, 2006)

the economic war unleashed by the U.S. against Cuba, the longest and most ruthless ever known, qualifies as an act of genocide and constitutes a flagrant violation of international law and the charter of the United Nations."


This kinda pissed me off......


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

Genocide as a result of "Economic" warfare ----- YGTBSM.

Choosing not to trade with another country is a violation of what international Law?? "The longest and most ruthless economic war ever known?" As opposed to the communist regimes of of North Korea and the USSR subjecting their own citizens to decades of privation due to their own policies. I am no student of "economic war[fare]". Sounds deadly, you will have to enlighten me on those weighty tomes which deal with the subject.

I can't believe you would just parrot the words of Cuba's foreign minister in the attached article. A foreign minister of a regime for which the UN also "defeated an amendment calling on Fidel Castro's government to free political prisoners and respect human rights." Can't you see the article states the UN overturned an amendment to compel the Cuban government to respect human rights - brilliant incite UN. I thought supporting human rights was part of the UN charter? It seems in your eyes curtailing human rights and holding political prisoners pales compared to trade restrictions?????

How about Castro torturing and killing his own people - what a peach he is. I've got some nice vacation property in Venezuela you might like! You want to know about ruthless you might talk to some of those who fled Castros deadly regime. I guarantee he killed more of his own people than any economic policies you might believe have. Torture, guns, and machetes kill much more effectively than any trade embargo I ever knew of.

As far as the UN and it's precious charter, you might also talk to some of the families who have lost countless family and contrymen in some of the latest "true" genocides that the UN has chose to sit back and watch without doing very much.

Last I care to say on the matter, I'm not going to contribute to this thread devolving into a political diatribe. I apologize my threadjack may have started it.

I apologize for any personal offense you take in my support of US policy, and my condemnation of the UNs record in prevention of what I consider true genocide.

Cheers,

BilyBarue


----------



## moki (Jan 12, 2004)

JPH said:


> the economic war unleashed by the U.S. against Cuba, the longest and most ruthless ever known, qualifies as an act of genocide and constitutes a flagrant violation of international law and the charter of the United Nations."
> 
> This kinda pissed me off......


It's also ridiculous... Cuba has the rest of the world to trade with, and somehow the US embargo is the source of all of their problems? I think not.

Haiti is another country in the region that the USA has no embargo with, and they are as bad off or worse off than Cuba. Yet we're to believe that were it not for the evil US embargo, Cuba would be a paradise.

Utter bullshit.


----------



## par (May 22, 2005)

Actually i think that the US embargo is causing unnecessary hardship for the cuban people. i think that regime change would have come much, much faster if the borders would have been open for economic and cultural exchanges.

if the reason for the embargo is to change the political situation within Cuba then it has been a failure. If the embargo is to punish the people of cuba and make their lives harder then it's a success. 

I just think that if the US really wants change then the embargo is a big failure with significant suffering as a consequence. And i find it ironic that the murderous and torturing state of red china is the economically most favoured nation right now. The current cuba policy is clearly pushing cuba deeper into relationship with venezuela and i see a lot of countries in that region turning towards leftist dictatorships right now. that doesn't appear to be in the best interest of the people of the united states but it may make some cubans in miami feel better about themselves. 

my few cents.


----------



## par (May 22, 2005)

Billy,

in response to your question of UN. It's not a resounding success but it also haven't been given credit for the areas where it has been successful.

Since the cold war ended (Statistics from oxford press and wikipedia where applicable):

* A 40% drop in violent conflict.
* An 80% drop in the most deadly conflicts.
* An 80% drop in genocide and politicide.
* A six-fold increase in the number of UN missions mounted to prevent wars, from 1990 to 2002.
* A four-fold increase in efforts to stop existing conflicts, from 1990 to 2002.
* A seven-fold increase in the number of 'Friends of the Secretary-General', 'Contact Groups' and other government-initiated mechanisms to support peacemaking and peacebuilding missions, from 1990 to 2003.
* An eleven-fold increase in the number of economic sanctions against regimes around the world, from 1989 to 2001.
* A four-fold increase in the number of UN peacekeeping operations, from 1987 to 1999.

the US GAO report states:
* The US Government Accountability Office concluded that UN Peacekeeping is eight times less expensive than funding a U.S. force. 
* A 2005 RAND Corp study found the U.N. to be successful in two out of three peacekeeping efforts. It also compared U.N. nation-building efforts to those of the U.S., and found that of eight U.N. cases, seven are at peace, whereas of eight U.S. cases, four are at peace, and four are not or not-yet-at peace.

There are some failures:
# Failure to prevent the 1994 Rwandan genocide, which resulted in the killings of nearly a million people, due to the refusal of the security council members to approve any necessary military action.[21]
# Failure by MONUC (UNSC Resolution 1291) to effectively intervene during the Second Congo War, which claimed nearly five million people in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), 1998-2002 (with fighting reportedly continuing), and in carrying out and distributing humanitarian aid.
# Failure to intervene in the 1995 Srebrenica massacre, despite the fact that the UN designated Srebrenica a "safe haven" for refugees and assigned 600 Dutch peacekeepers to protect it.
# Failure to successfully deliver food to starving people in Somalia; the food was instead usually seized by local warlords. A U.S./UN attempt to apprehend the warlords seizing these shipments resulted in the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu.

But to argue that UN as a whole is a fiasco is a distortion of evidence and facts. It doesn't win in everything it does but it does have significant successes when measured objectively.

I will agree that bureacracy is the significant challenge for UN looking forward.


----------



## rockyr (Aug 6, 2006)

My favorite part of the article:


> The General Assembly voted on the resolution soon after defeating an amendment by Australia stating that the U.S. laws and measures "were motivated by valid concerns about the continued lack of democracy and political freedom in Cuba."
> 
> It also would have called on Cuba to release all political prisoners, cooperate with international human rights bodies, respect the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and comply with all human rights treaties to which it is a signatory.


Typical UN. The bad ole US trade embargo is "genocide" but let's not expect Cuba to provide basic human rights.

Why do we let them stay in New York?


----------



## qwerty1500 (Feb 24, 2006)

mosesbotbol said:


> Democrats started the Embargo.


Yep, your right, the Dems did start it. Probably too much to hope anyway given the Dems traditional stand on free trade agreements. I just want to sit on the beach there and enjoy a good cigar. Oh well ...


----------



## mosesbotbol (Sep 21, 2005)

par said:


> Billy,
> 
> in response to your question of UN. It's not a resounding success but it also haven't been given credit for the areas where it has been successful.
> 
> ...


:tpd:


----------



## donp (Mar 5, 2006)

Personal bias aside, the UN is charged with the well being of all nations, and is not a forum for the agendas of powerful nations; at least it is not supposed to be. 
Tobacco is one of the main products that Cuba produces. It is a source of income for it's people; a nation has to have a source of income for it's people.
So my read is that the UN is advocating for Cuba on the basis of humitarianism.


----------



## stogie_kanobie_one (Feb 9, 2006)

Very interesting thread. I love the diversified viewpoints presented here. Very thought provoking facts presented above Par. Even I've tended to view the UN as having an anti-US agenda but I also tend to forget the fact that the UN does not exist to enforce US positions or agenda. I've always seen them as a failure particularly because of their failures against genocide occurring in Africa. 

While I am sure there are negative statistics to be found in regards to the UN, let me be the first to admit it was good to see those successes listed out.


----------



## luckybandit (Jul 9, 2006)

thanks for the post good article


----------



## luckybandit (Jul 9, 2006)

142 countries in favor of ending the embargo unbelievable

i think i'm the closest there! i could be the cs go to guy and just run over every weekend to pick up sticks for all our members


----------



## Baric (Jun 14, 2006)

rockyr said:


> Typical UN. The bad ole US trade embargo is "genocide" but let's not expect Cuba to provide basic human rights.
> 
> Why do we let them stay in New York?


Isnt the US meant to be a great lover of democracy and so surely an institution that gets together and discusses topics before voting on them in a highly democratic manner should be right up the US's alley?? seriously, the UN is not perfect and has failed many times but i think its a matter of respect and decorum that one should recognise it as a place where nations have an opportunity to be represented and to meet together in a situation that is at least slightly different to where they might normally meet eg war, trade negotiations, etc, etc). It may well be the case that the UN doesnt always work, but what makes up the UN are member countries, including the US itself, so referring to 'them' justs highlights a 'them' and 'us' attitude that seems to be accusing the UN of some ulterior and sinister motive, rather than respecting the democratic voice of each of those countries. no offence intended to anyone in particular, i was just surprised of see many of the sentiments in this thread, considering i thought the UN was recognised as an international symbol of democracy, at least to an extent.


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

par said:


> Billy,
> 
> in response to your question of UN. It's not a resounding success but it also haven't been given credit for the areas where it has been successful.
> 
> ...


IMO - statistics are easy to throw out there and manipulate. You should give some examples.

What really got me was how you brazenly state what a great job the UN has done to increase sanctions by a factor of 11, yet condemn the US for maintaining restrictions.

I am a free market economist - sanctions, tariffs, quotas, embargoes do not work, especially in the long run. But I am not going to blame Cubas problems on the US.


----------



## kjd2121 (Jul 13, 2006)

Stogiefanatic182 said:


> All I want are some legal cuban cigars damn it. This embargo is pissing me off big time.


Legal is no fun -


----------



## SDmate (Apr 24, 2005)

Stogiefanatic182 said:


> All I want are some legal cuban cigars damn it. This embargo is pissing me off big time.


I'm sure they'll be 2 to 3 times the price when they get to be legal here:hn


----------



## replicant_argent (May 13, 2006)

par said:


> Billy,
> 
> in response to your question of UN. It's not a resounding success but it also haven't been given credit for the areas where it has been successful.
> 
> ...


This all assumes that if the UN did not exist, no country would have the fortitude to step in these situations. Which makes most of your argument rather specious. The UN means well, but in essence is like a mean old guard dog who knows how to scare the shit out of you with a meaty growl, but most of his teeth are gone, those that remain in the mouth do the entire job the rotted teeth can't. Doesn't make for a very efficient guard dog, or predator, for that matter.


----------



## tecnorobo (Mar 29, 2005)

SDmate said:


> I'm sure they'll be 2 to 3 times the price when they get to be legal here:hn


supposing they ever do...

Anyhow, you've got to love inflation. It's one of the many things that make this country great :u

(all joking aside, so I don't get flamed, I actually do enjoy living here in the usa, and I'm glad to call it home. end rant about inflation haha)


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

Baric said:


> Isnt the US meant to be a great lover of democracy and so surely an institution that gets together and discusses topics before voting on them in a highly democratic manner should be right up the US's alley?? seriously, the UN is not perfect and has failed many times but i think its a matter of respect and decorum that one should recognise it as a place where nations have an opportunity to be represented and to meet together in a situation that is at least slightly different to where they might normally meet eg war, trade negotiations, etc, etc). It may well be the case that the UN doesnt always work, but what makes up the UN are member countries, including the US itself, so referring to 'them' justs highlights a 'them' and 'us' attitude that seems to be accusing the UN of some ulterior and sinister motive, rather than respecting the democratic voice of each of those countries. no offence intended to anyone in particular, i was just surprised of see many of the sentiments in this thread, considering i thought the UN was recognised as an international symbol of democracy, at least to an extent.


Baric,

Although Rocky wasn't the most diplomatic - you didn't answer his question. Why doesn't the UN do more to protect human rights in Cuba?

The attached article in the beginning of this thread states the UN voted down an amendment condemning Cuba's policy on human rights and political prisoners, yet they vote in a resolution condemning the US for maintaining trade restrictions. While, as Par was so generous to point out, the UN has supported an eleven fold increase in trade restrictions around the globe?

Tell me there is some logic here where human rights and the safety of political prisoners are deemed unimportant by the UN?

The UN has devolved into an impotent debating society that has failed miserably in the most deadly conflicts in the last 20 years.

Yes the United States is an advocate of democracy and freedom. That is the predominant reason we fund 20% of the UN (30% of their peacekeeping) budget.

Cheers,

BillyBarue


----------



## Baric (Jun 14, 2006)

billybarue said:


> Baric,
> 
> Although Rocky wasn't the most diplomatic - you didn't answer his question. Why doesn't the UN do more to protect human rights in Cuba?
> Very true actually, tbh i wasnt trying to answer the question as i do actually believe the UN can be nothing but an ineffective talkshop, i was more making a point about the strange 'them' and 'us' manner in which it was said.
> ...


As i said, i was more trying to work out what the statement meant than defending the UN, no offence intended!!

Cheers mate!


----------



## Hydrated (Aug 9, 2006)

billybarue said:


> MAJOR THREADJACK WARNING
> 
> For humanitarian (famine, natural disaster, health, disease, etc etc) issues I see the a great need and use for the UN.
> 
> ...


This is the finest analogy that I've ever seen concerning the USA/UN relationship... and one of the best posts that I've seen... ever.

The Sheep do indeed need protection by us American Dogs... But has anybody ever noticed why? It's because the bad guys always seem to ignore the UN's coalition of debaters.

When things get out of hand, that big ol' Dog comes lumbering out from under the porch to set things straight... and that makes the sheep nervous because we (yes, I am an American veteran) have the biggest baddest dog on the block. What the Sheep forget is that the Dog only comes out reluctantly... when America or our friends are threatened... or when innocents are abused by the likes of Castro, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, etc.

I am absolutely sick of Americans fighting and dying for people who immediately turn and kick our "Dog" as soon as we quell the bad guys who were mistreating or killing them. (Yes... you may read "France" here.)

But more importantly, I am sick of people spouting garbage about how America needs to exercise restraint in the face of evil... the problem is that we have too many Sheep in this world who do not recognize Evil when it threatens their very lives.

If you need any clarification... just see the quote in my signature block.

Bobby


----------



## donp (Mar 5, 2006)

Baric said:


> Isnt the US meant to be a great lover of democracy and so surely an institution that gets together and discusses topics before voting on them in a highly democratic manner should be right up the US's alley?? seriously, the UN is not perfect and has failed many times but i think its a matter of respect and decorum that one should recognise it as a place where nations have an opportunity to be represented and to meet together in a situation that is at least slightly different to where they might normally meet eg war, trade negotiations, etc, etc). It may well be the case that the UN doesnt always work, but what makes up the UN are member countries, including the US itself, so referring to 'them' justs highlights a 'them' and 'us' attitude that seems to be accusing the UN of some ulterior and sinister motive, rather than respecting the democratic voice of each of those countries. no offence intended to anyone in particular, i was just surprised of see many of the sentiments in this thread, considering i thought the UN was recognised as an international symbol of democracy, at least to an extent.


Baric:
What you are seeing in this thread is a type of ethnocentrism, and is not uncommon. We in the US are feeling somewhat embattled and in many cases where the UN is concerned, letdown. The opinions rendered here does not make them "right" opinions, but as we are accustomed to, we can render our opinions without fear. It is the birthright of everyone born in this country after the Revolutionary war. Many Americans feel let down by the UN due to a lack of support from it's member countries, especially in view of the US has provided a large part of the monies to insure the UN's operation and existence. But, our reasons for joining the UN in the first place are good reasons, and reflect well on the more positive and laudable aspects of our country. However, like many of the member countries of the UN, the US may be wrong. I don't pretend to know all of the reasons JFK came up with to apply the embargo so many years ago; they may not be as clear as they were when they were imposed. For me, there is a real danger of "new reasons" being applied for very different reasons. Cuba is not a threat to us anymore (if it ever was), it's people are practically destitute. Do we continue to hammer a poor people based on an antiquated political philosophy of a system which ceased to be effective almost as soon as it was born? I don't know, but I wonder why we continue to harbor a harsh attitude toward that nation when we have so many other fish to fry.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

donp said:


> Cuba is not a threat to us anymore (if it ever was)


I am staying out of this thread for the most part due to my personal life experience which most know how I feel. I have enjoyed reading this thread thus far.

Your post is a very good one but just wanted to point this out.
As far as a current threat, won't argue that.
However, "if it ever was", can we all say Nukes aimed at us and the two most powerful nations moments away from pushing the red button?
October, 1962. Cuban Missile Crisis.


----------



## Made in Dade (Aug 5, 2006)

Blueface said:


> I am staying out of this thread for the most part due to my personal life experience which most know how I feel. I have enjoyed reading this thread thus far.
> 
> Your post is a very good one but just wanted to point this out.
> As far as a current threat, won't argue that.
> ...


What he said


----------



## donp (Mar 5, 2006)

>>However, "if it ever was", can we all say Nukes aimed at us and the two most powerful nations moments away from pushing the red button?
October, 1962. Cuban Missile Crisis.<<

With all due respect, they weren't nukes, the nukes never got there; there was however a very real threat of that happening though; at least thats what the history books tell us. And I suppose my teachers making us all duck under our desks at the time as part of an emergency drill, lent some reality to it. The point I am making though is that it is ancient history, and for purposes of the current topic, not relevant. It would however make for a very interesting discussion to review the Cuban missile crisis from hindsight; as an 8 year old it scared the bejeebers outta me.


----------



## RGD (May 10, 2006)

donp said:


> . . . It would however make for a very interesting discussion to review the Cuban missile crisis from hindsight; *as an 8 year old* it scared the bejeebers outta me.


Which brings up another note - we (The USA) are very close to handing off an embargo to a generation that wasn't even alive when the cause of it all started.

Ron


----------



## JPH (Jun 30, 2006)

moki said:


> It's also ridiculous... Cuba has the rest of the world to trade with, and somehow the US embargo is the source of all of their problems? I think not.
> 
> Haiti is another country in the region that the USA has no embargo with, and they are as bad off or worse off than Cuba. Yet we're to believe that were it not for the evil US embargo, Cuba would be a paradise.
> 
> Utter bullshit.


Haiti is way worse...great point.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

donp;592731With all due respect said:


> You are absolutely correct about the nuclear warheads not being there yet but the silos were built and there definitely loads of missiles delivered to the island with one intent and one intent only, to aim them at us with nuclear warheads that were to be delivered.
> 
> This article does a nice job of codensing the whole crisis.
> http://library.thinkquest.org/11046/days/index.html


----------



## ATLHARP (May 3, 2005)

replicant_argent said:


> This all assumes that if the UN did not exist, no country would have the fortitude to step in these situations. Which makes most of your argument rather specious. The UN means well, but in essence is like a mean old guard dog who knows how to scare the shit out of you with a meaty growl, but most of his teeth are gone, those that remain in the mouth do the entire job the rotted teeth can't. Doesn't make for a very efficient guard dog, or predator, for that matter.


Indeed, 
I have to admit as well the corruption (Oil for Food program) that works within the UN has not seemed to be been addressed in any sincere or effective manner. As well, I must say when you have countries such as Syria with a chair on the security council and countries such as Iran or Cuba chairing the Human Rights commission; it is hard to revere the organization in a serious manner. I am sorry I think the misguided and specious globalism which permeates the UN is self-deafeating to its initial aims and will continue to be so till they make a some semblance of sound judgement concerning tyrannical regimes. 
I for one believe the UN is a failed and outdated experiment which works against the effort to provide democracy and freedom in the world. 
The UN may have made some progress in certain initial areas (mostly with US support and aid), but its effort to put tyrannical and oppressive regimes on equal footing with free republics is absurd on its face.:2

ATL


----------



## Hydrated (Aug 9, 2006)

donp said:


> >>However, "if it ever was", can we all say Nukes aimed at us and the two most powerful nations moments away from pushing the red button?
> October, 1962. Cuban Missile Crisis.<<
> 
> With all due respect, they weren't nukes, the nukes never got there; there was however a very real threat of that happening though; at least thats what the history books tell us. And I suppose my teachers making us all duck under our desks at the time as part of an emergency drill, lent some reality to it. The point I am making though is that it is ancient history, and for purposes of the current topic, not relevant. It would however make for a very interesting discussion to review the Cuban missile crisis from hindsight; as an 8 year old it scared the bejeebers outta me.


I must stand by Carlos (Blueface) here...

I never thought seriously about Cuban politics until a few years ago when I got into a lengthy conversation with my Dad about the Missile Crisis... and I have to give you a little insight into reality here... you say you have an 8 year old's memories of it, but let me tell you how it changed one man and the world.

My father is a retired US Navy officer who was a 22 year old sailor sitting offshore on an aircraft carrier during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Our government had listened to Castro and his cronies threaten to attack the United States. He was grasping for power not only in Cuba, but in the world. He aligned himself with Soviet Russia because they coveted a base just 90 miles from mainland America, and they promised him support with which he could feel even more invincible.

Castro had proved himself to be ruthless and bloodthirsty... the U.S. could NOT allow Castro to have a nuclear threat practically within a rock's throw of us.

My father sat aboard ship and smoked cigarette after cigarette. Attack aircraft sat on deck fueled, armed, and engines running... not just warmed up... they were running with pilots strapped in. He wondered if any of us would survive... these maniacs wanted to hold America hostage to a Soviet/Cuban nuke threat. And Castro may just use it... he'd shown himself to be willing to kill to get his point across, and pushing a button was easy.

For hours Dad sat and waited... and by the time the Soviets blinked and backed away, the world changed for him and millions of other people. It all became real... and dangerous.

So you see... that's why some of us stand up. Those of us who truly understand the Evil that faces humanity. We don't do so with bravado... we don't get much recognition... and we often get abused by the very Sheep who we have sworn to protect. Sheep who do not see the Evil that can sometimes live in the hearts of men. This Evil long ago wrapped itself around the cold heart of one man... and Fidel Castro embraced it.

Bobby


----------



## HarryCulo (Aug 18, 2006)

Hydrated said:


> So you see... that's why some of us stand up. Those of us who truly understand the Evil that faces humanity. We don't do so with bravado... we don't get much recognition... and we often get abused by the very Sheep who we have sworn to protect. Sheep who do not see the Evil that can sometimes live in the hearts of men. This Evil long ago wrapped itself around the cold heart of one man... and Fidel Castro embraced it.
> 
> Bobby


Well said


----------



## donp (Mar 5, 2006)

>>So you see... that's why some of us stand up. Those of us who truly understand the Evil that faces humanity. We don't do so with bravado... we don't get much recognition... and we often get abused by the very Sheep who we have sworn to protect. Sheep who do not see the Evil that can sometimes live in the hearts of men. This Evil long ago wrapped itself around the cold heart of one man... and Fidel Castro embraced it.<<



Bobby:
Thank you for your attempt at providing me with a history lesson. But you see, as an 8 year old, I had my memories too, and they were extremely formative ones. I was in Catholic school and our teachers (Nuns) made us take time out to pray for our safety and the safety of the entire world. You see Bobby, they knew what could happen in a world gone mad; I/we didn't. So, as a child will, I took my cues from them, and I became worried which was my first real introduction to the evil that men can do.
I am an American Bobby, that means I get to have opinions, feelings and gripe about any thing I damn well feel like. It also allows me to be free from want, and in most cases fear. I know about the history of our nation, and I know my freedoms did not come cheap. But I also know that I must guard my freedoms from ignorance, overconfidence and greed. It is a delicate balance, one which (IMO) we must all engage, otherwise we can farkle it up. That means Bobby that we each have to pay attention to what our leadership says and does, we have to inform ourselves, and we must have opinions about the affairs of our country: a government by the people and for the people. Some of us are sheep but, as we have seen over many decades in the history of our nation, those sheep can turn into lions when provoked.
Incidently, that 8 year old I desribed is now a grownass man.


----------



## Hydrated (Aug 9, 2006)

donp said:


> >>So you see... that's why some of us stand up. Those of us who truly understand the Evil that faces humanity. We don't do so with bravado... we don't get much recognition... and we often get abused by the very Sheep who we have sworn to protect. Sheep who do not see the Evil that can sometimes live in the hearts of men. This Evil long ago wrapped itself around the cold heart of one man... and Fidel Castro embraced it.<<
> 
> Bobby:
> Thank you for your attempt at providing me with a history lesson. But you see, as an 8 year old, I had my memories too, and they were extremely formative ones. I was in Catholic school and our teachers (Nuns) made us take time out to pray for our safety and the safety of the entire world. You see Bobby, they knew what could happen in a world gone mad; I/we didn't. So, as a child will, I took my cues from them, and I became worried which was my first real introduction to the evil that men can do.
> ...


I hear you, Bro... and that's what makes the U.S. work!

BTW... did you ever think about the duck-and-cover thing? I lived 3 miles from the largest Air Force Base on the East Coast and a Strategic Air Command base at that! I wondered how getting under my desk was gonna save my 4th grade ass from turning to plasma in the blast!


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

donp said:


> ... Cuba is not a threat to us anymore (if it ever was) ...


When I read that this afternoon I turned my computer off in utter disbelief. The brink of nuclear Armageddon as a result of a madman 90 miles from our shores. Nice job trying to explain away this comment but I ain't buying it - well the missiles weren't there yet. Come on!! I'll never say this again, but thank god for Nikita Khruschev.

Since you like to apologize for American policy you could have used the standard Socialist/marxist/communist slant that we invited the Cuban missile crisis upon ourselves by placing Nukes in England (thanks Baric BTW), Italy, and Turkey - all lands directly threatening Cuba at the time?!?!?  So of course Castros complicity with his Communist Masters in Moscow was completely justified.



donp said:


> I am an American Bobby, that means I get to have opinions, feelings and gripe about any thing I damn well feel like.


Me too, and your opinion that the embargo is a travesty for humanitarian reasons because we are depriving the Cubans of their only (or nearly so) source of reaching for a better life is highly uninformed. Again, I am no fan of any trade restrictions, but to disavow the true humanitarian injustice perpetrated by Castro's regime is amazing.

BillyBarue


----------



## donp (Mar 5, 2006)

Hydrated said:


> I hear you, Bro... and that's what makes the U.S. work!
> 
> BTW... did you ever think about the duck-and-cover thing? I lived 3 miles from the largest Air Force Base on the East Coast and a Strategic Air Command base at that! I wondered how getting under my desk was gonna save my 4th grade ass from turning to plasma in the blast!


Bobby:
Yes, I did on that day but not until after I got home. There was news all over the TV about the crisis, and naturally they went into the dark side of Nuclear wars etc, and I realized "we woulda been dead anyway!??" But the Nuns did what they thought would protect us, and what did they know. Their only info was based on air raid drills they learned during WW2. I suppose that is one oif the reasons I think so much of women; they will do anything they can within their power to protect children, even if they aren't their own.


----------



## Darb85 (Jan 30, 2005)

so let me get this streight. Not trading with cuba is genocide but killing people for believing in santa, or talking on thier own behalf, or how about giving them fair wages or allowing people in that are going to help. these are ok. The UN is a bunch of hypocrites. This is rediculos.



> The General Assembly voted on the resolution soon after defeating an amendment by Australia stating that the U.S. laws and measures "were motivated by valid concerns about the continued lack of democracy and political freedom in Cuba."
> 
> It also would have called on Cuba to release all political prisoners, cooperate with international human rights bodies, respect the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and comply with all human rights treaties to_ which it is a signatory._


so then you are saying it is ok to not comply to stuff it said it would do but reward them for not doing it by cutting our embargo?

give me a friggen break

hey UN, Grow some Farggen balls and stand up for whats right. I know yall dont like the US, but not everything we do is unsubstantuated or wrong. Half the UN would be speaking german if it wasnt for the US. twice.

and how the hell is it genocide? we arent killing anyone, thier government seems to be pretty good at that all by its self. lets stop standing up for tyrants and begin standing for human rights, political freedom, and the freedom to speak ones mind.

and off the soap box:sb


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

Darb85 said:


> _This is rediculos_.


That typo struck me as especially funny for some reason. Like something Ricardo Montalban would say :r

Why is everyone getting so worked up over this? UN does this every year.


----------



## donp (Mar 5, 2006)

billybarue said:


> When I read that this afternoon I turned my computer off in utter disbelief. The brink of nuclear Armageddon as a result of a madman 90 miles from our shores. Nice job trying to explain away this comment but I ain't buying it - well the missiles weren't there yet. Come on!! I'll never say this again, but thank god for Nikita Khruschev.
> 
> Since you like to apologize for American policy you could have used the standard Socialist/marxist/communist slant that we invited the Cuban missile crisis upon ourselves by placing Nukes in England (thanks Baric BTW), Italy, and Turkey - all lands directly threatening Cuba at the time?!?!? So of course Castros complicity with his Communist Masters in Moscow was completely justified.
> 
> ...


Cool yer Jets Billy. because I don't own the same slant on this as you do, doesn't mean you can take that approach with me, or with anybody else for that matter. And who made you the defender of thought and opinion anyway? I made no attempt at apologizing for american policy, I thought I was explaining to a non american some reasons for some opinions and attitudes he saw in this thread; and those are as varied as are the people in this country. And what in blazes do you know about standard Marxist policy anyway? As an american I don't have to stand for that kind of insult from you in here either. You should have left your computer turned off if you weren't gonna do any more than read into what others opinions are, and spout off on your own. And just for your information, since you apparently left this out of your attack, the Battista regime was a helluva lot worse in terms of humanitarian injustice than Castro ever was; look it up. He gambled with Nikita in the Bay of Pigs and lost, and because of that his country has been suffering ever since. And FWIW Nikita wasn't long in power after that as well. 
I read history pal, and my opinions on this are not uninformed. I have been wondering about the Bay of Pigs incident in recent years, ever since more information has been made public about it. What I have figured out about it is that Kennedy did the right thing at the time, he did not allow the Russians to set up missiles in our backyard; USSR ships were stopped and ordered to turnaround; the USSR tried to bluff and threaten; US forces did not back down; they couldn't and wouldnt, and the world is a better place for it. The implications were larger than Cuba whom we could have swatted like a bug. So get over yourself and make some room for others.

I apologize to others for my outburst in this place. I think it is bad form and do not like doing it. But, please know, I am not in the habit of taking crap from anyone, especially where my opinions are concerned. We ought to be able to agree or disagree without reprisal. 
I'm done here


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

donp said:


> And just for your information, since you apparently left this out of your attack, the Battista regime was a helluva lot worse in terms of humanitarian injustice than Castro ever was; look it up.


First, 
To all,
the thread had been a good debate so far, so lets not let it go down hill as they all do.
Everyone step back and respect each other's view, no matter how silly it my seem to the other.

Now,
You are not correct on this statement.
No need to look that up.
Books are written in the perspective of the person writting it.
Just speak to any Cuban such as myself.
If not myself, speak to my 70 year old dad.
If not my dad, my 90 year old aunt, who was an educator of Cuban history pre-Castro and into Castro's early years.
Speak to the many Cubans whose family members have disappeared.

Yes, Batista was a ruthless a..hole himself but Batista never killed the number of people Fidel has made disappear to never be found. Batista never came even remotely close to doing to the Cuban people what Castro has done. Very few come close to the likes of Hitler, Saddam and Castro when it comes to "eliminating" the opposition and disregarding human life. Batista's mother, sister, daughter and grand daughter never fled Cuba to run from him. Same cannot be said about Fidel. When the woman that brings you to this world runs from your evil, what is left to be said?


----------



## Darb85 (Jan 30, 2005)

carbonbased_al said:


> That typo struck me as especially funny for some reason. Like something Ricardo Montalban would say :r
> 
> Why is everyone getting so worked up over this? UN does this every year.


And yes there are times i cant spell. Mostly when Im ranting.

rich corinthan leather!


----------



## Darb85 (Jan 30, 2005)

Blueface said:


> First,
> To all,
> the thread had been a good debate so far, so lets not let it go down hill as they all do.
> Everyone step back and respect each other's view, no matter how silly it my seem to the other.
> ...


Batista was scary and treated his country like pigs but I agree with Carlos here. Fidel is way worse. I have a number of friends that are cuban and they all think that the embargo is good because if we were to relax on it, the government would get even more powerful and the people would be worse off. At least thats the feeling I get from them. And I swear the next person who tells me that The cuban people like Fidel im going to have to hit them in the head with a few 4x4s. If he is such a good thing for the country, why are people converting cars into boats to get to the united states. or getting in a life raft and hoping to end up in the US. please Explain how Fidel is good for a country.

I work in insurance. this summer we had a claim for a guy that went to cuba, Fidel liked his boat, He had a knock on the boat that morning, 15 armed men forced him and his family off the boat and stole it. it is now The presidential yacht for Fidel and his family. The man is a scondrol(yes I know, spelling, I suck) If Cubans that have escaped his oppression want the embargo to stay for fear of what might happen if it is repealed isnt that saying something?

Food for thought

Thats all Im saying


----------



## replicant_argent (May 13, 2006)

I think there might be some gorillas here that are under the impression that Castro isn't a pathological maniac. They may imagine that he is a leader that strives to help his country on the way to respectability.

They would be wrong.

It really doesn't take much effort to get the skinny on Fidel and Raul. Fidel is a despicable despot. Raul is a cruel, insane egomaniac on par with the Uday/Qusay Hussein level of depravity. Raul has, and will continue, to make people just disappear with the wave of a finger. Frankly, he might even be more scary than his brother.


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

Interesting how you take my "opinion" as an insult to you ("or with anybody else for that matter"). When your arguments don't hold water the easy thing is to vilify your antagonist as the aggressor.

As you desperately point out, we may each express our opinion. Categorizing my opinion as an insult does not make it so. Nor does it give any credibility to your statement that we should all be free to express our opinion - unless of course I happen to disagree with you.

BTW, I have multiple graduate degrees, a year of Russian language studies, two semesters of Soviet Economic studies by an instructor who defected from the Soviet Union (as a persecuted Jew) and earned his PHd from Duke, partial read of the Communist Manifesto give me a little insight into Marxist doctrine. And my career has been spent analyzing the social/economic structure of our enemies - many of whom have been and continue to be Marxist based in their doctrine.

Again I find your position uninformed when you begin comparing the marginal benefits of one dictator to another. Two wrongs don't make it right, isn't that so. And in that vein, I will apologize to you. But as I say, my words were in the spirit of a debate on the matter. If you choose to take my *opinion* as an insult to lend more credence to your arguments you are free to do that as well. I would never tell you to do otherwise or curtail speaking your opinion.

Cheers,

BillyBarue


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

billybarue said:


> Interesting how you take my "opinion" as an insult to you ("or with anybody else for that matter"). When your arguments don't hold water the easy thing is to vilify your antagonist as the aggressor.
> 
> As you desperately point out, we may each express our opinion. Categorizing my opinion as an insult does not make it so. Nor does it give any credibility to your statement that we should all be free to express our opinion - unless of course I happen to disagree with you.
> 
> ...


Keep in mind that's it can be difficult to understand the tone of certain posts since this is in written format. I'm sure in person it'd be quite clearer. But posts, such as the last braggart laden mess I just quoted, give you a rather hostile tone.

Think before you post


----------



## HarryCulo (Aug 18, 2006)

Ahhhh. Nothing like a Castro-Communist-Cuban debate in the morning. 

And here's my :2 , or my :BS , depending on how you want to translate it.

Batista was a crooked, filthy bastard....... but even he fled when Castro came calling. Batista was a kitty-cat compared to Castro. Batista is only remembered as a dirty deal maker, interested in lining his own pockets more than anything else. Castro will go down as a mudering, ruthless dictator. When history looks back at him, and he will be compared to Hitler, Marx, etc.

OK, that's enough for me.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

HarryCulo said:


> Ahhhh. Nothing like a Castro-Communist-Cuban debate in the morning.
> 
> And here's my :2 , or my :BS , depending on how you want to translate it.
> 
> ...


Oye consorte!
We are on for tonight?
Lets go have a Mojito, dance up a storm, smoke some great stogies, and be grateful we are on this side of the globe to do it. Tomorrow, Fidel will still be there and debate will continue as it has for nearly 48 years. Amazing, 48 years come this January!
*Me cago en su madre que lo pario!*


----------



## Darb85 (Jan 30, 2005)

HarryCulo said:


> Ahhhh. Nothing like a Castro-Communist-Cuban debate in the morning.
> 
> And here's my :2 , or my :BS , depending on how you want to translate it.
> 
> ...


agreed.


----------



## Hydrated (Aug 9, 2006)

Blueface said:


> Lets go have a Mojito, dance up a storm, smoke some great stogies, and be grateful we are on this side of the globe to do it.[/B]


I wanna go hang out where Carlos is!! :w


----------



## Darb85 (Jan 30, 2005)

Hydrated said:


> I wanna go hang out where Carlos is!! :w


me too! damn


----------



## HarryCulo (Aug 18, 2006)

Hydrated said:


> I wanna go hang out where Carlos is!! :w





Darb85 said:


> me too! damn


It's definitely a party when Carlos is around. Alright you guys are invited.

But remember, you're either with us, or against us.... it's the Cuban way


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

carbonbased_al said:


> Keep in mind that's it can be difficult to understand the tone of certain posts since this is in written format. I'm sure in person it'd be quite clearer. But posts, such as the last braggart laden mess I just quoted, give you a rather hostile tone.
> 
> Think before you post


Thanks for your "opinion" 

Good advice I'll do my best to keep that in mind. :u

BillyBarue


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

HarryCulo said:


> But remember, you're either with us, or against us.... it's the Cuban way


:r :r :r 
Al,
I missed the "Democracy" in that.


----------



## Made in Dade (Aug 5, 2006)

donp, here is your humanitarian injustice right here.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/15869949.htm

This is just one of hundreds of stories. One of my great uncles was thrown in jail for THIRTY YEARS ! for not wanting to give up his land.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

Made in Dade said:


> donp, here is your humanitarian injustice right here.
> 
> http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/15869949.htm
> 
> This is just one of hundreds of stories. One of my great uncles was thrown in jail for THIRTY YEARS ! for not wanting to give up his land.


*On time off, Rodríguez said, they were forced to watch videos of political speeches, marches and the Cuban government Mesa Redonda -- Round Table -- TV news shows. He escaped in 2004 and now works odd jobs in Hialeah*.
This is jus another one of those Cuban dissidents that doesn't know what he is talking aobut. I lost count. How many is that now that have come over here in the past 48 years due to things being so good in Cuba v. how many have left here to go live there?
*Curacao Drydock has asked the judge to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction.*
I am not an attorney and would assume this would be the first line of attack on a summary judgment/motion to dismiss but wouldn't they also contest the charges as unfounded?

That said, time to sign out of this thread.
I have enjoyed reading it and although I intended to stay out, man is it tough!


----------



## RockyP (Aug 31, 2006)

RGD said:


> To quote:
> 
> "It was the 15th straight year that the 192-member world body approved a resolution calling for the U.S. economic and commercial embargo against Cuba to be repealed "as soon as possible."
> 
> ...


i totally believe that something should be done not just so we can have cigars but like stated in the quote above nothing will happen.


----------



## Baric (Jun 14, 2006)

HarryCulo said:


> Castro will go down as a mudering, ruthless dictator. When history looks back at him, and he will be compared to Hitler, Marx, etc.
> 
> 
> > btw was Marx ever a ruthless, murdering dictator or anything like it? As far as i know he was a writer and theorist who lived life penniless and in exile with no political power over any country?
> ...


----------



## billybarue (Mar 20, 2006)

Baric,

Without comment, but I got to know - is that Avatar who I think it is? I thought about it before but didn't have the guts to ask. 

Keep reading and studying my friend, and don't leave out Adam Smith and "Wealth of Nations" or how about de Tocqueville "Democracy in America". Got to look at both sides!

Cheers - MATE!!!

BillyBarue


----------



## Neuromancer (Sep 7, 2005)

It's all a bunch of :BS...the US Congress wants to tell us we can't buy Cuban cigars because of the embargo and the fact that by law, we're forbidden to do business with Cuba, while at the same time, talking out of the other side of their mouths, they make exceptions for certain types of businesses and allow some US citizens and businessmen to do business with Cuba "legally"...

Can I export to Cuba?

Like the lying two-faced SOB's our congress has always been, be they Republican or Democrat, they have made the embargo selective...they sit and pontificate and tell one American he can sell farm goods to Cuba for cash, and it's okay with them, but then they want to tell another that Cuba is "the enemy" and we can't do business with them...:BS

U.S. Trade With Cuba? You Bet!

We do business with Cuba right now, and we've been doing business with Cuba...it's just all those horses asses in Congress that want to say who can do business with the Cubans and who can't...it's the same as it's always been...they make the laws that they impose on most American citizens, then they break them, themselves, or bend them for their cronies...we should throw all of them out of office and start over...we'd hardly do worse than what we've got now or what we're getting in a few months...

U.S. COMPANIES MAKE MILLIONS AT CUBA BUSINESS FAIR

*Nearly 300 U.S. agribusinesses, farmers and farm state lawmakers visited Cuba over the weekend for the first U.S. trade show on the Caribbean island in four decades, racking up sales of at least $66 million in cash, Cuba's food import agency says.

American farmers and businesses showed off a variety of food products -- ranging from M&Ms to bison steaks -- and agricultural goods at the U.S. Food & Agribusiness Exhibition in Havana. Some 20,000 Cubans reportedly visited the exhibition to sample U.S.-brand name food items from companies such as Perdue Farms, Hormel Foods, and Tyson Foods.*

They're selling M&M's and Purdue Chicken to Cuba but telling me I can't buy a Cuban cigar...screw them...what gives them the right to play fast and loose with the embargo and then tell me I can't? As always, there's a double standard in effect...one law for them (the US politicos) and another law for us...

US state signs Cuban trade deal 

New U.S.-Cuba Trade Association Formed

And if ya really want to get right down to it, if this whole embargo business is about "human rights," then how come we're doing business with *RED CHINA*, and have been for decades while they systematically destroy Tibet? This whole bit of embargo business was just retaliation for our failed "Bay of Pigs" manuever and for the "Cuban Missile Crisis"...it was just a way of slapping Castro's hands for daring to call the Soviets to give him missile bases to thwart any future invasion prospects we might have come up with...and in the end, he didn't get the missiles so what's it all about now, cause it ain't about "human rights"...guess it's just about the :BS it's always been about...furthermore, I think our embargo and our failed policies have just helped Castro stay in power...


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

Neuromancer said:


> It's all a bunch of :BS...the US Congress wants to tell us we can't buy Cuban cigars because of the embargo and the fact that by law, we're forbidden to do business with Cuba, while at the same time, talking out of the other side of their mouths, they make exceptions for certain types of businesses and allow some US citizens and businessmen to do business with Cuba "legally"...
> 
> Can I export to Cuba?
> 
> ...


Holy crap Marc!!!
What the heck did you sprinkle in your lunch today?
Is Marie slowly using rat poison on you?:r
Do you have a new found urge for cheese?


----------



## Neuromancer (Sep 7, 2005)

Blueface said:


> Holy crap Marc!!!
> What the heck did you sprinkle in your lunch today?
> Is Marie slowly using rat poison on you?:r
> Do you have a new found urge for cheese?


Nah, it's just in my old age I've had enough of the :BS that the average American citizen has to put up with, with those jerkoffs in congress...they make laws for the rest of us, then break them, themselves...it's a rat's nest that needs to be cleaned out, on both sides of the aisle...with all the partisan politics, they've totally forgotten there's a plain vanilla, middle-of-the-road, average American who no one seems to give a damn about...the liberals of the far left have the Democrats...the conservatives of the far right have the Republicans...where's the party for the centrists?

PS - ...and get rid of that freakin' fat assed avatar, Carlos...every time I see it I want to u...


----------



## Baric (Jun 14, 2006)

billybarue said:


> Baric,
> 
> Without comment, but I got to know - is that Avatar who I think it is? I thought about it before but didn't have the guts to ask.
> 
> ...


The avatar is indeed who you think it is - dont be afraid to ask -ive already been asked it before and it sparked off a very interesting debate with Blueface. As i said to Carlos, its not necessarily the politics of the man i have him as my avatar for, but thats the topic of another thread/PM.
Never heard of de Tocqueville, thanks for the tip, ill search him out, sounds like a good read! I find Adam Smith to be a little outdated personally, theres a lot to pick holes in in his work. On the other hand, hes the father of modern economics (some might say economics in general) and "Wealth of Nations" is an important seminal work, i also feel.
I totally agree with having to look at both sides of the argument (i could be cheeky here and say thats a dialectical aproach worthy of Marx!!) as its the only way to progress a mature debate. Thanks again for the tips-

Cheers mate!!


----------



## Hydrated (Aug 9, 2006)

Baric said:


> The avatar is indeed who you think it is - dont be afraid to ask


Who is it? Looks sorta like Che...


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

Baric said:


> -ive already been asked it before and it sparked off a very interesting debate with Blueface.


I would hope interesting in the sense of the dialogue over the subject matter. Not inferring you don't mean that. Just clarifying as I thought we had great dialgue via PM.

What is ironic about Che's image is that it is the most commercialized face in the world. I believe it holds the record still.

I am certainly not intending on any insults so I expressly state that.
Just purely want to give the perspective of a Cuban on a man that helped influence his country and drive him away from there, never to return to date.

What is odd about Che's image and I can't understand although I truly support our principles of our nation and believe in freedom of expression, is that as a Cuban, I would equate wearing Che's image to one of the following:

Image of Hitler on t-shirts or any of his croonies that were later tried and convicted.
Image of Saddam on t-shirts or any of his co-horts now sentenced along with him.
Image of Amin on t-shirts or any of his hench men.

I respect anyone believing in an extreme left form of government as all have their opinions. I just feel sorry for those that support it, never having lived it as I did.
Bottom line, Che was a murderer.
Whatever he stood for did not support murdering people when no war was declared. It was done simply based on their political views and potential opposition to the new government. Not because they were Batista's people. They were regular people, who just did not like what Castro turned out to be when he showed his true colors.

Many can choose to believe this or continue believing what they wish.
I respect you either way.
However, lets call an ace an ace.


----------



## Hydrated (Aug 9, 2006)

Kind of interesting that you found a kindly, smiling image of Che to represent yourself to the CS community.

I'd doubt that many of his victims smiled...

I'm done with this thread, too.


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

Baric,
I want to state this publicly as I know you PM'd me but the rest won't see it.
I just want to add to this thread that I personally don't think of you any different than any human being, all worthy of respect. By virtue of you PM where you advised me no insult was ever intended, you are a stand up guy, and I knew that already. Because we don't agree in philosopies doesn't make you any less than me.

You and I have had numerous PM discussions that frankly, I enjoyed as they were enlighting as we shared different perspectives. I don't want you to be cornered because of what you believe in but couldn't help address that Che part. I certainly feel bad if responsible for any cornering as I truly view all this as a debate and if human beings can't have debates, then there is the worse alternative, war. Trust me, I try so, so hard to stay out of it because I am so close but it is not easy.

I appreciate the fact you changed your Avatar but don't feel compelled by me or anyone else. It is OK to stand up for what you believe in. In America, that is the liberty we enjoy and cherish so much. To not allow you that practice would be to give in to what I ran from so many years ago. However, like yelling fire in a theatre as a joke is not considered freedom of speech due to its chaos result, just be aware that expressing that image is one that brings a lot of pain to a whole nation in exile, no different that an image of the other folks I listed.

Sincere regards.
Perhaps one of these days we can have a drink and a smoke and talk about it in person and learn about the influences in our lives that lead us down certain paths.


----------



## luckybandit (Jul 9, 2006)

this is a great thread some good reading


----------



## Baric (Jun 14, 2006)

Blueface said:


> I appreciate the fact you changed your Avatar but don't feel compelled by me or anyone else..


Thank-you my friend, im grateful for your response. In the end i changed my avatar as tbh when i came to CS i had no idea how divisive and controversial the image is (it certainly holds nowhere near so much potency in the UK). i felt that not only was it offensive to some (not my intention) but that CS is a cigar board first and such a political image is perhaps not in the best interests of the board. hopefully Byron will be a less controversial avatar!


----------



## Hydrated (Aug 9, 2006)

Baric said:


> ...hopefully Byron will be a less controversial avatar!


Pigs are cool too!


----------



## Baric (Jun 14, 2006)

Hydrated said:


> Pigs are cool too!


:r very true!


----------



## Neuromancer (Sep 7, 2005)

Baric said:


> ...hopefully Byron will be a less controversial avatar!


I think Byron would be controversial only if you hated poetry or were an anti-semite so you're probabaly safe...


----------



## GOAT LOCKER (Aug 7, 2004)

donp said:


> With all due respect, they weren't nukes, the nukes never got there; there was however a very real threat of that happening though; at least thats what the history books tell us.


Guys, time to update your history books... Since the fall of the USSR, Russia has admitted they had nukes in Cuba, both tactical artillery rockets and bombs to be carried by Il-28's.


----------



## Neuromancer (Sep 7, 2005)

GOAT LOCKER said:


> Guys, time to update your history books... Since the fall of the USSR, Russia has admitted they had nukes in Cuba, both tactical artillery rockets and bombs to be carried by Il-28's.


Ummm...and since the USSR went bye-bye the Cubans would have had no one to return them to, so you're saying they still have them?


----------



## GOAT LOCKER (Aug 7, 2004)

Neuromancer said:


> Ummm...and since the USSR went bye-bye the Cubans would have had no one to return them to, so you're saying they still have them?


Not sure how you could make that leap. The USSR had nuclear weapons in Cuba BEFORE the "Cuban Missile Crisis". I don't know when they were removed.


----------



## Airborne RU (Oct 7, 2006)

GOAT LOCKER said:


> Not sure how you could make that leap. The USSR had nuclear weapons in Cuba BEFORE the "Cuban Missile Crisis". I don't know when they were removed.


I think what donp was saying is that sites were set up but the nukes were never shipped to Cuba. The US emplaced a Naval Embargo and tensions were rachetted up 10 fold.


----------



## Airborne RU (Oct 7, 2006)

This discussion has been pretty interesting.

At this point in time its probably best to consider the implications of a raised embargo.

The best case scenario is that the embargo is lifted and while supplies of Habanos are shorter, events aren't catastrophic. The cigar industry in cuba remains state owned and enjoys an influx of capital and new ideas. The opening of the US market spurs the NC cartel to have to begin aggressively market their non-cuban cigars world wide (especially in places like France) and eventually through the competition there is a "correction" in cigar prices in the US for both Cuban and non-cuban.

The worst case scenario is that supply and quality plummet causing cost to skyrocket. Counterfieting runs rampant as ever. In an effort to protect their turf, NC companies file competition complaints with the US trade commission alledging that Habanos enjoy too many subsidies leading to "unfair" competition.

I don't know, there are just too many factors to account for. Thoughts?


----------

